MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402464112 · doi:10.11159/eee24.106

Hilbert-Pair Shaped Resonator for Ku-Band Applications

2024· article· en· W4402464112 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mustafa Mahdi Ali, Enrique Márquez Segura, Taha A. Elwi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Engineering and Waveguides
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKu bandResonatorComputer sciencePhysicsTelecommunicationsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ku-Band is a crucial part of the electromagnetic spectrum widely employed in satellite communications, radar systems, and other high-frequency applications.To enhance the performance of Ku-Band devices, such as novel resonator structures have been investigated.The Hilbert Resonator has shown promise due to its unique characteristics.This paper introduces the Hilbert resonator and conducts a comprehensive literature review to highlight its potential applications, design methodologies, and performance advantages in the context of Ku-Band technologies for their unique propagation properties and high data rate capacity.The proposed resonator is developed based on the second iteration of Hilbert-shaped fractal geometry.The proposed resonator is developed from a number of unit cells to suit the applications of Ku-band systems.Therefore, five-unit cells are introduced; each unit cell is constructed from a pair of Hilbert curve geometry.This number is considered after a comprehensive parametric study to recognize the optimal required number of unit cells.The proposed design is printed on Roger substrate to occupy an area of 30×35mm 2 when coupled to a 50Ω microstrip line.It is good to mention that the proposed resonator shows S12 -17dB at 14.25GHz.Our work is developed using a numerical parametric study based on CST MWS to determine the optimal design.We validated the obtained results from the optimal design using HFSS numerical simulations.Finally, a great agreement is achieved between the simulated results based on the involved software packages.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and ScienceSame topicMicrowave Engineering and WaveguidesFrench-language works237,207